In a nutshell
This article investigated the long-term safety and effectiveness of Aquablation vs transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the treatment of urinary symptoms related to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH; an enlarged prostate). The authors concluded that the two procedures had similar safety and effectiveness after 2 years.
Some background
Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are common in men with BPH. The enlarged prostate can press on the urethra and make it harder to pass urine and completely empty the bladder. TURP is a well-known treatment option for BPH. It involves the removal of sections of the prostate that blocks the passage of urine through the penis. However, it can cause ejaculation problems.
An alternative treatment option is with Aquablation. This uses high-pressure water to remove the prostate tissue. However, the long-term effectiveness and safety of Aquablaton compared to TURP is still under investigation.
Methods & findings
The study involved 181 patients with BPH. They were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 received Aquablation. Group 2 received TURP. The patients were followed up at 2 years.
There was no difference in the voiding symptoms results, urine flow or prostate-specific antigen (PSA; a protein made by cells of the prostate) level reduction between the two groups. Sexual function was stable (no change) in group 1 and slightly decreased in group 2 after 2 years.
Group 1 had a slightly higher rate of needing repeat surgery after 1 year compared with group 2 needing (1.7% vs 0%). At 2 years, repeat surgery was needed in 4.3% in group 1 vs 1.5% in group 2.
The bottom line
The authors concluded that Aquablation and TURP had similar safety and effectiveness after 2 years in patients with BPH.
The fine print
This study only included patients with smaller prostate sizes (up to 80ccs). Further studies are needed for stronger evidence.
Published By :
Advances in therapy
Date :
Apr 26, 2019
